• Howdy! Welcome to our community of more than 130.000 members devoted to web hosting. This is a great place to get special offers from web hosts and post your own requests or ads. To start posting sign up here. Cheers! /Peo, FreeWebSpace.net
managed wordpress hosting

Man shot 5 times by Police in London wasn't linked to bombings after all

When they shot him was it total fear or racism? i don't know - i'm hoping the investigations into this and the public's questions will all get some answers goin' to prevent something like this from happening again.
 
Either way, this guy didn't seem to be very endowed in the area of street smarts..."He then ran down an escalator after being approached by up to 20 plain-clothed police officers and tried to board a train". This isn't Sao Paulo anymore.

OK, do you really think at this point that they're still NOT the police? I admit this is a tragedy, but he set himself up for that.
 
Last edited:
Dean said:
Shoot him in the arm/leg. Terrorists have a legal right to a fair trial too you know.
Click to expand...
Please ignore jmiller's post completely. :biggrin2:
 
A new law might be implemented in the future, kinda like this..

IF Person == Looks like a Terrorist THEN
Shoot Person in the head at once.
ELSE
Look for another Person
END IF
Click to expand...

Zac
 
It needs a little something:

for (days.past=0; days.past < days.tofeelsafe || incedent; days++, suspicious?kill.suspect():kill.suspect());
 
See, in the U.S. this crap doesn't happen. If it turns out U.S. police shot him and he was innocent, they wouldn't tell the public, they'd put something on him to justify his killing, "so and so has been linked to the multiple murders 2 years ago involving 16 year old [insert female name] and her friend [insert another female name] in [insert big city name], [state]"


I'm just kidding.
 
Meksilon said:
Dude that's just wrong.

Police in the UK shoot dead the least people per capita compared to other first-world western societies like Australia and the US. They shoot less because they don't carry guns. The US shoots the most.Uniformed police officers DO NOT CARRY GUNS.
Click to expand...
How is that wrong ?

That doesn't change the racial prejudices they hold for the most part.

I didn't say they shot many people now did I?

Quit with the trolling already.
 
Depends of how they told him to stop.

If they yell "Police! Stop!" then you stop.
If they yell "Stop you motherfcker, give me your wallet!" you do what you want.

Basically the issue here would be if they identified themselfs as police oficers or not.
 
ZoomCities said:
A new law might be implemented in the future, kinda like this..

IF Person == Looks like a Terrorist THEN
Shoot Person in the head at once.
ELSE
Look for another Person
END IF
Click to expand...
Theres this sickhs temple a few miles from here. They all look like terrorists caus of their bandages on their heads. Should we terminate them all? :bandit2:
 
Dean said:
The man mistakenly shot dead by police in the belief that he was linked to a series of attempted bomb attacks has been named by police.

Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old Brazilian, was killed by officers on Friday as he tried to board a Tube train at Stockwell, south London.

Detectives later established that he was not connected to attempts to blow up three Underground trains and a bus in the capital the day before.

The Metropolitan Police said an inquest would be opened and adjourned into his death, which they described as a "tragedy".

The shooting happened at 10am when armed plain clothes police officers shot Mr de Menezes as he tried to board a train at the underground station.

He had emerged from a nearby house that was under surveillance because of a suspected link to Thursday's attempted bomb attacks. His clothing and behaviour added to the officers' suspicions.

He caught a bus to Stockwell Tube where he was challenged by officers, who told him to stop. The man then bolted down an escalator, according to witnesses.

It appears he tried to board a train before being shot five times in the head by an officer with an automatic pistol.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair had said on Friday that the shooting was "directly linked" to anti-terror operations.

However, Scotland Yard said: "We are now satisfied that he (the man) was not connected with the incidents of Thursday, July 21, 2005."
Click to expand...

Very Sad...

Things like this just shouldn't happen.
 
Based on the circumstances I can understand it. That doesn't make it less of a tragedy, but he's in a house being monitored due to terrorism. He exits the house with heavy clothing on even though it’s a warm day. When instructed to stop he takes off running. Here in the USA police always identify themselves first. If they yelled "police, stop" and he kept running then it is his own fault. If you have that much circumstantial evidence that a guy is a suicide bomber of course you'll shoot to kill instead of wound. Plus if the police were terrorists they wouldn't try to abduct someone in a crowded area, and they would have just shot without yelling stop.

All of that changes though if it turns out they didn't identify themselves, or if he wasn't truly running away. (He could have been movingly quickly to catch the train before it left...)

As is though I think the most you can do is call it a tragedy. There are to many unknowns to convict the police. If he had been a suicide bomber the police would be applauded for reading the signs, and taking those shots. Both sides need to be considered on all issues.
 
jmiller said:
haha. That sounds most excellent.

I religiously watch COPS and To Serve and Protect.

I'll have to keep an eye out for Reno 911.
Click to expand...

It is a funny show. I'm a big COPS fan, I've watched all 600 episodes. Never watched To Server and Protect or heard of it. Unlike other countries, we only get to watch shows made in the U.S., so if that show is filmed in Canada, I'm outta luck.
 
To Serve and Protect is Canada's answer to COPS.
Covers mostly the Toronto and Vancouver area. (It's most amusing when I see someone/somewhere I recognize on the show.)

Take cops, remove guns and high speed chases, add silly domestic disputes and you have TSAP.
 
Todd said:
Based on the circumstances I can understand it. That doesn't make it less of a tragedy, but he's in a house being monitored due to terrorism. He exits the house with heavy clothing on even though it’s a warm day. When instructed to stop he takes off running. Here in the USA police always identify themselves first. If they yelled "police, stop" and he kept running then it is his own fault. If you have that much circumstantial evidence that a guy is a suicide bomber of course you'll shoot to kill instead of wound. Plus if the police were terrorists they wouldn't try to abduct someone in a crowded area, and they would have just shot without yelling stop.
Click to expand...
I disagree. The man was innocent.

If they yelled "police, stop" and he kept running then it is his own fault.

You're forgetting, in England police are not allowed to carry guns. If a gang in plain clothes pulls guns on you, it doesn't matter if they yell "police stop" or not, the absolute last thing you're going to think it is is police.

I wouldn't believe it's police.

It doesn't matter what the police believe, it matters what they do. In this case they shot an innocent man dead, because he became frightened when they pulled guns on him.

The reason that he "could have been a terrorist" isn't good enough. Because he wasn't. There is no "could have been" - we do not live in a world of chance. Justifying on chance is just plain wrong. We live in a world of causality. That's cause and effect. If something happens it happens for a reason. Sure you can toss a coin and not know the outcome.

But is that why he was shot? Because they tossed a coin and didn't know the outcome? He was shot = effect. Law of causality says for every effect there is or are distinct cause/s. You can trace the causes, here they are:

1. He was believed to be a terrorist.
2. He ran from plain-clothed armed police officers.

He had no control whatsoever over #1. Over #2 he may have had some control, but the police were the ones who were supposed to be in control of that situation, not him. Failure is their fault, not his.

From here it's conjecture. Possible alternative actions for police to take in accordance with #1 (thinking he's a terrorist):

2a. Arrest the man peacefully at his home.
2b. Search the man before he reaches public transport.
2c. Search his home while he's out.
2d. Interview his friends and relatives.

Possible alternative actions for police to take in accordance of #2 (fleeing from armed police):

3a. Be sure to intercept him when he runs in the direction of the trains. Since they believe he's a terrorist - and there was apparently about "20" of them, they should have had police positioned anticipating his next move to keep him in check.
3b. This is an extension of 3a. They should have had uniformed police officers intercept him so he'd know they're police.
3c. The police carrying guns to be uniformed and clearly identifiable.
3d. Treat him as innocent and being "potentially guilty".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top